Employee Engagement: What It Is Not

The previous post explored and explained what employee engagement means and is, from several POVs. To round out the circle, let me clarify what employee engagement is not.

We look for traits of really engaged behavior to recognize those individuals, use them as examples, and allow them to operate as champions for engagement within the culture. We should also be clear-eyed in noticing behaviors that signify the absence of engagement. It is easier to institute improvement when we know both what we want the improvement to be and what we want to improve.

The antitheses of engaged employee are unengaged (coasting in neutral) and actively disengaged (applying the brakes if not in full reverse) employees. Some of the traits cited by Coffman and Gonzalez-Molina in their book Follow This Path are:

Not Engaged

• Meets the basics.
• Confusion or ability to act with confidence.
• Low-risk responses and commitment.
• No real sense of achievement.
• Possible commitment to organization, but not always to role or work group.
• Will speak frankly about negative views.

Actively Disengaged

• Normal reaction starts with resistance.
• Low trust.
• "I'm OK, everyone else is not."
• Inability to move from the problem to the solution.
• Low commitment to company, work group, and role.
• Isolation
• Won't speak frankly about negative views but will act out frustration, either overtly or covertly

The difference between the two types above is merely degree. The manager's objective is to increase (and improve) employee engagement across the entire population. So attention is paid to both types, but the actively disengaged has a longer path to follow from his status quo to acceptable engagement. Hence, he garners more attention as one potentially to be released earliest.

Please be aware that scores of solutions are offered by dozens of sources, solutions that substitute for real employee engagement. These substitutes, though somewhat valuable, fall short of the behavior that continually generates results a business requires: profit, customer loyalty and referrals, employee retention, quality production, and more.

Whether observed, indicated in employee opinion surveys, voiced in town hall sessions, or simply assumed, these employee characteristics:

• Motivation: a drive to succeed, to achieve.
• Commitment: an alignment with a desired goal or objective and willingness to work towards same.
• High morale: a combination of energy and involvement that boosts productivity.
• Job appreciation: an enjoyment of and gratitude for the work one does.
• Busy-ness: a willingness to keep oneself fully occupied, rather than idle.
• Volunteerism: offering one's services for assignments outside the job description.
• Quantity = quality: an opinion that producing more work is as valuable as producing good work (see busy-ness)

should not be confused with  engagement. Each item listed (except the last) is valuable in its own right. Each item (except the last) may contribute to or result from true employee engagement. But none of them alone stands for the individual's investment of energy, skill, ability, and eagerness in the work performed.

As always, I hope you'll offer comments and insights by posting a Comment below.

Comments

[Jan Lee]

Good articles Tim. I would suggest that those not engaged exhibit classic signs of distress. In fact, each category you quoted (not engaged and actively disengaged) corrolate with Dr. Taibi Kahler's Process Communication Model's definitions of first and second degree distress.There are easy ways of recognizing when an employee is going into distress and easy ways to stop that descent. The key is knowing which employee needs what intervention! Luckily, that is easy to learn as well. Thank you for these articles,Jan Lee Paceline Communication Solutions
janlee@pacelinecommunication.com

[The Friend]

Thanks for the comments, Jan. I'm interested in learning more about Dr. Kahler's Process Communication Model.

[Mike Healy]

Hi Tim,

I have read both the articles Employee Engagement You Asked, Employee Engagement, What it is not.

I have found these summaries to be very interesting. A synopsis of what is out there is always useful but I felt your articles were of great practical use too.

Which tools could be used as the basis of a simple survey of teams employee engagement to prompt discussion with the team?